David Tilson

[Interparliamentary Delegations, February 7th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian delegation of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association respecting its parliamentary mission to the country that will hold the next European Union presidency in Berlin, Germany, September 27 to 29, 2006 and its participation at the fourth part of the 2006 ordinary session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe held in Strasbourg, France, October 2 to 6, 2006.

[Criminal Code, February 6th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the member has given an excellent summary of the impaired driving laws in this country and the developments that have occurred over the years. I particularly enjoyed his comments about the number of defences that have occurred on technicalities with respect to the Breathalyzer test.

I appreciate that what he is trying to say is that the government is simply trying to keep up with the times and with the changes in technology and that the law needs to be altered. I am sure MADD Canada will agree with his comments.

The member indicated a number of pages that were put forward in Martin's Criminal Code, or whatever it is called now, of the number of summaries of defences that have occurred with respect to the Breathalyzer test.

I wonder if the member has any information that might be available from the government as to the number of defences that have been used with respect to the Breathalyzer test that have resulted in dismissals for technicalities.

[Canada Post, December 13th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, rural constituents in my riding have told me that their mail delivery is a mess. Canadians depend upon reliable, timely delivery of their mail regardless of where they live. Rural Canadians are worried about changes to rural mail delivery being undertaken by Canada Post.

Could the minister responsible for Canada Post update the House on rural mail delivery and remailers?

[Petitions, December 12th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition with 240 signatures from the residents of the town of Caledon, Ontario, who are terribly upset with Canada Post and who want the government to ensure that traditional rural mail delivery continues for the town of Caledon.

[Criminal Code, November 9th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the hon. member for Wild Rose, raised the issue of how the Bloc Québécois argument disregards interest in the victim. That is an excellent point. We on this side have raised that many times and of course the Bloc has responded by saying that not enough money has been given to victim organizations. That is not what this legislation is all about.

This legislation says that the third time someone is convicted, not charged but convicted, for a very serious offence the onus is on the convicted person to show why he or she is not going to be a dangerous offender. That is what it is all about. It has nothing to do with all the other garbage that the Bloc Québécois is talking about.

I would like to zero in on one of the areas that my colleague from the Bloc raised when he said it is going to cost too much money because there is no room in the jails to put these terrible people. I assume from that he is saying, we should let them go. I do not think the member realizes what the whole purpose of this is about. It is about, first, a penalty and, second, protecting the public and the victim.

I ask the member to reconsider his position and support this legislation.

[Committees of the House, November 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's comments with respect to establishing a pay equity tribunal and a pay equity commission. My immediate observation is we have an awful lot of commissions in Ottawa. We have an Ethics Commission. We have an Information Commission. We have all kinds of commissions and they all cost us a substantial amount of money. They all do good things.

At this point I am not denying anything that the member is saying. I know she sits on the committee that studied these issues. However, has she or the committee any idea what the pay equity tribunal would cost the taxpayers of this country and what the pay equity commission would cost the taxpayers of this country?

[Rotary Club, November 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the Rotary Club of Palgrave, Ontario, will celebrate its 25th anniversary on November 4, 2006. The club is marking this significant anniversary by donating to the village of Palgrave a town clock, which will be unveiled and dedicated on Saturday, November 4, at 2 p.m., for all to enjoy and which is part of the celebrations recognizing this milestone.

For 25 years the men and women of the Palgrave Rotary Club have been making a difference in the lives of others. Rotarians volunteer their time and energy to serve our community, to sponsor children and young people, and to give a helping hand to those most in need around the world.

I sincerely congratulate the Palgrave Rotary Club on this remarkable achievement and for the many outstanding contributions the club has made to our strong and proud community. I also wish the club many more years of excellent community service and good will. Congratulations.

[Criminal Code, October 31st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, this bill is talking about convictions for very serious, horrible crimes, and not one conviction, not two convictions, but three convictions.

My colleague from the Bloc Québécois talked about how he has been in practice for 25 years. God bless him, I expect most of the time it has been in defending these terrible people and naturally his whole knowledge is with respect to the criminal.

I listened to his speech very carefully. It was a good speech. I did not agree very much with it, but I listened to it very carefully. He never mentioned the word “victim” once. It was all about the rights of the criminal; it was all about whether these people are receiving a fair deal. These are after the convictions. We are talking about sentencing.

My question for the member and all the Bloc Québécois members if they are all going to take this position is, do they not care about the victim? The people whom I speak to in my riding care a lot about the victim. They are fed up.

[Criminal Code, October 31st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have a couple of comments and a question with respect to what the member said, speaking on behalf of the New Democratic caucus. I have the impression, when I hear her arguments, that she is asking the government to stop picking on the dangerous and high risk offenders. I do not understand that.

If we listen to what the member said, she gave four or five of what appeared to be reasonable arguments, and that seemed to be the thesis of what she was trying to present. I will not comment on all of them, but I will comment on the reverse onus clause, which she suggests is unconstitutional.

She is right. When people are charged, the long-time principle in our court systems, going back to the English system and in fact most systems around this world, they are innocent until proven guilty. This is not about that. This is about sentencing. We are talking about dangerous and high risk offenders, bad people, people who have done bad things three times. It is all about that. This legislation is saying if that happens then the onus is on them. There is a certain discretion to the prosecutor to bring this forward and there is also a discretion on the court system as to whether it will deem that person a dangerous offender.

The member seems to be giving the impression that when a person is charged, it is a reverse onus clause. That is not fair because the bill does not say that.

Could the member comment on that and perhaps rethink her position on this one position?

[Canada Awards for Excellence, October 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to announce that the Region of Peel has become the first government in Canada to earn the National Quality Institute's prestigious Canada Awards for Excellence Gold Trophy.

The Canada Awards for Excellence is an annual awards program that recognizes Canadian organizations which, through a commitment to innovation, productivity, a healthy workplace and ethics, have demonstrated sustainable measures of continuous improvement.

On Thursday, October 26, a presentation of the award will be made to the Region of Peel at its headquarters located in Brampton, Ontario. I would like to take this opportunity to sincerely congratulate the Region of Peel Chairman Emil Kolb, Caledon Mayor Marolyn Morrison, Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion and Brampton Mayor Susan Fennell, and their councillors, on this tremendous achievement and for the excellent example it has set for all governments.